[mandmandam]

> As a condition for joining the controlled tour, The New York Times agreed not to ... publish geographic details

> according to the Israeli military

> There are no known entrances to the tunnel within the hospital itself

> According to the World Health Organization, Israel has conducted at least 686 attacks on health facilities in Gaza since the start of the war, damaging at least 33 of Gaza’s 36 hospitals

> In other tunnels discovered by the Israeli military, soldiers have used Palestinians as human shields, sending them on ahead to scour for traps.

... You read this article as proof vindicating the IDF's version of events? ... Huh.

If anyone wants to see the full story for themselves they can read it at https://archive.ph/giBjP#selection-1185.0-1189.43

[dralley]

You can literally see both the tunnel and the hospital entrance in the picture NYT provides.

[bigyabai]

To echo the parent; it doesn't matter. It didn't matter 2 weeks ago when Israel killed 3 Catholics bombing a church.

The IDF's doctrinal destruction of civilian infrastructure and attacks on hostages are illegal under international law. If the target was entrenched personnel, then leveling a hospital reflects absolutely miserable trigger discipline on the IDF and their officer's behalf. It's not WWI anymore, if we can't agree on international accountability then we learn nothing from the horrors of our mistakes.

[dralley]

It literally does matter. International law literally makes this exact distinction. And the very article we're commenting on states as much.

>Under the laws of war, a medical facility is considered a protected site that can be attacked only in very rare cases. If one side uses the site for military purposes, that may make it a legitimate target, but only if the risk to civilians is proportional to the military advantage created by the attack.

If you want to argue it's illegal, you have to make an argument that it's not proportional vis-a-vis the colocated military infrastructure, because otherwise international law says it's fair play in both letter and spirit. If they were completely off-limits then everybody would co-locate their military and humanitarian infrastructure without much thought - and the end result of that game would be worse for everyone. That's why international law is the way it is. Civilian infrastructure cannot be allowed to be used as a shield for military infrastructure.

On that point - you would have a difficult time making a legal argument that hitting the edge of the parking lot (deliberately avoiding a strike to the hospital itself, and without doing significant structural damage to the hospital) to kill the Hamas #1 (at that time) was not proportional. If you want to make that argument with some other strike (like the church one) then go ahead - I'm extremely open to the idea that the IDF is crossing the line with many of their strikes - but that's a different argument than falsely saying that any strike next to civilian infrastructure is a war crime by default.

[mandmandam]

If you want to bomb 33 out of 36 hospitals you should need better evidence than a single photo of a tunnel near a hospital. One which Israel built themselves in the 80s btw [0].

And let's not forget that Israel were caught lying about such evidence on multiple occasions in the past. Remember "the list" that was actually a calendar? Remember the MRI room storing 5 guns - or was it 6? Only recently, we had this: [1].

All local and foreign doctors have consistently denied all such IDF claims. All we have is the word of the IDF (while countless UN, HRW, eyewitness reports etc say otherwise).

We know for a fact that Israel have repeatedly targeted medical personnel in their clearly marked vehicles, such as during the Hind Rajab incident; or when they massacred a convoy and buried them in a mass unmarked grave, then claimed that their lights weren't on to 'justify' it until a recovered phone proved otherwise [2].

And we know, without a doubt, who does embed military infrastructure under hospitals and beside civilians. Israel [3].

If you are a real person, arguing in good faith, I urge you to consider how badly you have been lied to. It's never too late to wake up.

0 - https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-israel-build-bunker-...

1 - https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-16/israeli-video-claimed...

2 - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g2z103nqxo

3 - https://mmnews.tv/every-accusation-is-a-confession-idf-repor...

[mandmandam]

Just to clarify - are you referring to the tunnel which Israel built itself in the 80's [0]? The one which was admitted not to even connect to the hospital in your own article?

If so - were you aware that Israel built it?

Or have you been justifying the destruction of at least 33 hospitals, to us and to yourself, this entire time, based solely on that 'evidence'?

0 - https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-did-israel-build-bunker-...